Posts Tagged ‘judge’
Greg ‘Cure Ukay’ De Hoedt Ordered To Pay Peter Reynolds £5,000.
Yesterday in the High Court, represented by the top firm of media lawyers, David Price Solicitors and Advocates, Greg De Hoedt’s application to set aside the judgment I had obtained against him was dismissed. He was ordered to pay me £5,000 and refused leave to appeal.
A full transcript of the Judgment will be published here shortly. Suffice to say that the words spoken by the Judge, Master Nicholas Bard, vindicated me far more than I had dared to hope. He also had extremely harsh words to say about Chris Bovey and Sarah McCulloch, the other people I have been forced to sue for defamation.
As far as De Hoedt is concerned, he will have to find £5,000 14 days from now or face enforcement action. There is also a further hearing on 4th June 2014 when I am confident of obtaining an injunction against him restraining him from further defamation. If he breaches this he will go to jail.
Greg was a friend of mine and I put a lot of time, effort and money into helping him, both with his health problems and his campaigning. CLEAR also funded him on one of his trips to the USA. I greatly regret that he turned against me but I count him as a victim in this as well. He was misled and manipulated by Chris Bovey who is the real villain behind all of this. Bovey is a liar and a bully, not to say Europe’s biggest dealer in highly toxic synthetic cannabinoids. He will use and abuse anyone to achieve his own ends. Justice will not be achieved until he too has been called to account.
Justice Prevails. De Hoedt And McCulloch Defeated In The High Court.
Greg De Hoedt
At 10.30am this morning there was a case management conference before Master Eastman concerning my claim against Greg De Hoedt. I was awarded judgement against him in February and the next stage is for a High Court Judge to assess the damages and costs he must pay me.
It is only now, after more than a year trying to avoid my claim, that De Hoedt has faced up to it and appointed solicitors. They represented him today. He was not present. His solicitors applied to have the judgement set aside. Master Eastman refused. They then applied for the proceedings to be stayed pending my appeal against the striking out of my claim against Chris Bovey. Again, Master Eastman refused. It is now up to me to propose the next steps and how exactly a Judge can assess the damages I am due.
Sarah McCulloch
At 11.00am there was a hearing before Master Eastman concerning my claim against Sarah McCulloch. She had obtained judgement against me by deception. She had made false statements to the Court and pursued an application without giving me notice, so I that had no idea that it was taking place. Today was my application to have her judgement set aside. I was successful and Master Eastman ordered that my claim should be reinstated.
Master Eastman also considered McCulloch’s claims that I was harassing her by writing to her about the case. She had made a further false statement to the Court that I had been given an ‘Harassment Warning’ by the police. In fact a police officer from Harlow in Essex had telephoned me a few months ago to say that McCulloch had made a complaint. We ended up laughing together at how ridiculous her allegation was when I was writing to her about a High Court case at the address she had filed with the Court.
I explained to Master Eastman that ever since I had discovered that McCulloch is diagnosed with two mental health conditions I had made generous offers to try and settle with her. He was gentle with her but very firm and told her however hard she found it, she had to communicate with me about the case.
Afterwards, McCulloch and I had a five minute discussion outside the Court and I made a further offer to settle. She explained that she had now edited one of her articles to remove the false allegation that I had lied about submitting a report to the Home Affairs Select Committee in 1983.
My offer to McCulloch is very generous, far more so than it would be were it not for her health problems. It was sad that as I walked away she shrieked “You’re a bigot!” Nevertheless, I remain hopeful that she will see sense and we can both put this unhappy episode behind us.
For A Bad Cop, Prison Is Just The Start
Doing His Duty
I hope that ex-Police Sergeant Mark Andrews had a really bad night on Tuesday. It was his first night in jail after being sentenced to six months for assaulting Pamela Somerville, an innocent member of the public, someone he was paid and trusted to protect. See here for the full story.
I hope he had a really bad day yesterday too. I hope he’s scared. I hope he’s ashamed and racked with guilt. I hope he has a really bad day tomorrow and the day after and the day after that. I hope every single minute of his jail time is frightening, distressing, humiliating and painful. I hope he misses his wife and two children and is beside himself with grief and shame at the way he has let them down. The man is pond life scum. He should be extremely grateful that he got off so lightly because if I was the judge I would have considered six years to be a more appropriate sentence than six months. In fact, I really hope that the CPS appeals the sentence. There’s no way that it is sufficient. He’ll be out in just 13 weeks and free to go back to his family. He should be made to suffer.
When a police officer commits a crime, particularly an assault while on duty, it is far, far more serious than when it is an ordinary member of the public. It is a breach of trust. It is like a bank manager stealing from his own bank. It can never be forgiven. It has to be marked as the most heinous of crimes.
Sleazy Starmer
I suppose we have to be thankful that the CPS even brought charges in the first place. It and its thoroughly sleazy boss, Keir Starmer, seem to do everything they can to avoid bringing police officers to justice. Keir Starmer has the brazen cheek to pontificate about changing the system of murder charges when he is complicit in enabling police officers to avoid justice! See here. We’re really not interested in his thoughts about the future of justice in Britain. He is too deeply ensconsed in the corruption and failures of the past. We want him out of his job and on the scrapheap with Andrews. In fact, I’d have him in the cell next door to Andrews and I’d put them both back on slopping out but they could do each other’s rather than their own.
I congratulate Wiltshire Constabulary on bringing Andrews to justice and particularly the police officer who turned him in. That man deserves a medal.
Killer
Thug
This should send a signal to thugs like Delroy Smellie, Simon Harwood and every other bent cop that you will never, ever get away with your behaviour. Even if you manage to wriggle free like Smellie with the assistance of slimeball judges or evade the full force of the law like Harwood with the help of his crony Starmer, we, the British public, will never let you off. It won’t ever be over for you, whether or not you do time in prison. You and your kind are on a life sentence. You will be despised, reviled, hated and subject to ridicule and abuse until the end of your days. You deserve nothing less.
Boris To Decide MP Prosecutions?
Up and down the country Chief Constables have been deluged with complaints about local MPs. Many constituents believe that their MP’s conduct has gone beyond error and misjudgement to the point where the police need to investigate. There is huge anger and if Harriet Harman’s “Court Of Public Opinion” gets its way then there is to be much humiliation and many prison sentences for miscreant MPs.
The Man For The Job
Chief Constables are accused of sitting on their hands and being in fear of taking on such high profile suspects. In fact, there is confusion about jurisdiction and about what recourse is open to the public if the police will not take action.
An attempt has already been made to bring a private prosecution against Home Secretary Jacqui Smith. District Judge Bruce Morgan at Redditch Magistrates Court adjourned the application for a summons and referred the matter to the Metropolitan Police, saying that the applicant could *come back to court” if the Met failed to investigate.
The Association Of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) says that the Met is taking the lead and that jurisdiction for all MPs is likely to be in the Met’s hands as expenses claims are paid out from Parliament and not in the constituencies.
The Met’s current position is still that it’s thinking about it. It “needs to understand the Parliamentary processes for expenses” as part of its assessment as to whether to launch an investigation. After its clumsy and inept handling of the Damian Green affair it’s not surprising that discretion should be the better part of its valour but really, it’s a shabby response to what is probably the greatest ever betrayal of public trust.
Perhaps that’s what the problem is. It all just seems too big, too grand, too important. In reality, the sordid, self-serving decisions that so many MPs have taken are just as small and pathetic as any shoplifter or petty thief.
What we need here is clarity and courage. We deserve a police service that can see through the obfuscation, blather and bluff. If you look at them in the same way as you would a shoplifter or a petty thief , brush away their pathetic excuses, well, officer, what are you going to do now?
If the police fail to take action, where will the public turn? The Independent Police Complaints Commission has a very narrow remit. It can only address questions of police misconduct. Questions of policy, or the conduct of Chief Constables are a matter for the local police authority and in London, that means the Metropolitan Police Authority, chairman of which is ex-MP, Boris Johnson. The Association of Police Authorities (APA) is waking up to this fast approaching buck and where it might be stopping. Let’s hope Boris is too.
The Disappearing Canoeist
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tees/7520803.stm
What utterly absurd sentences for Mr and Mrs Darwin! When there are violent thugs loose on the streets, this is the sort of idiocy that brings the law into disrepute. The judge has made himself look an utter fool and has done nothing at all in the cause of justice. Clearly these two people were dishonest but the greatest harm they perpetrated was on their sons. I have no sympathy for the insurance company at all because, by definition, it is engaged in a process of long term, calculated but legalised fraud. How many years are the directors and regulators of Equitable Life looking at?
Prison is a place for those convicted of violence, not for sad people like the Darwins. How can the judge live with himself? What rationale can there be for this? I hope he has no connection with the insurance industry. He should have no further role in the judicial system.
Peter Reynolds 